Legal Opinion

Lee v. Lee

District Court, W.D. Kentucky

Decided July 12, 2019No. 3:19-cv-00172Unknown

1Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION MIKE HOWARD LEE PLAINTIFF v. Civil Action No. 3:19-cv-172-RGJ WILLIE M. LEE, et al. DEFENDANTS * * * * * MEMORANDUM OPINION Pro se Plaintiff Mike Howard Lee filed the instant action. Because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the Court must undertake a preliminary review of the complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e); McGore v. Wrigglesworth,

114 F.3d 601

(6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds by Jones v. Bock,

549 U.S. 199

(2007). For the following reasons, the action will be dismissed.…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. West v. AtkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Jones v. BockSupreme Court of the United States · 2007

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API